
On September 28, 2008, Falcon 1 Flight 4 lifted off at 4:15 p.m. (PDT) from the Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) launch site on Omelek Island at the U.S. Army Kwajalein Atoll (USAKA) in the Central Pacific, about 2,500 miles southwest of Hawaii. It achieved an elliptical orbit of 621 x 643 km, 9.3 degrees inclination, and carried into orbit a payload mass simulator of approximately 165 kg (364 lbs), designed and built by SpaceX specifically for this mission. Here’s a video of the launch:
The Falcon 1 – designed and manufactured from the ground up – became the first privately-developed liquid fuel rocket to orbit the Earth.
SpaceX is but one of two notable ventures by the former co-founder of PayPal, 38-year-old Elon Musk. He is also Chairman and CEO of Tesla Motors, developer of high-end electric automobiles.
By the age of 12 Elon Musk had sold his first commercial software, a space game called Blaster. Sixteen years later he sold his first company, Zip2, to Compaq's Alta Vista division for $341 million in cash and stock. His next venture was PayPal, acquired by eBay for $1.5 billion in stock in 2002. Musk’s SpaceX venture is developing a set of launch vehicle and spacecraft products intended to increase the reliability and reduce the cost of both manned and unmanned space transportation. With the Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 vehicles, SpaceX intends to offer highly reliable/cost-efficient launch capabilities for spacecraft insertion into any orbital altitude and inclination. Starting in 2010, SpaceX's Dragon spacecraft will provide Earth-to-LEO transport of pressurized and unpressurized cargo, including resupply to the International Space Station (ISS).
Musk says he was motivated to found SpaceX after learning NASA had no plans to send man to Mars. Musk considers space exploration one of the main areas that will "most affect the future of humanity:"
Currently, the space transport business serves both national government and large commercial customer segments. This involves government payloads, including military, civilian and scientific satellites, a market segment estimated at nearly $100 billion a year.
SpaceX is far from the only commercial space vehicle manufacturer -- ARCASPACE, Bigelow Aerospace, Blue Origin, EADS Astrium, Reaction Engines Ltd., Space Adventures, and XCOR, to name a few, are other private ventures to watch. The fledgling space industry is reminiscent of the early days of the personal computer, when a number of established vendors and startups reversed-engineered Microsoft’s DOS and manufactured PCs using the Intel 8080 chip set. From Zenith to IBM to Compaq to HP and Dell, we’re likely to see a similar industry shakeout in the private space vehicle market segment in the coming decades.
Back on terra firma, Musk’s Silicon Valley electric vehicle (EV) startup -- Tesla Motors -- is currently the only automaker building and selling non-prototype highway-capable EVs in North America or Europe. (The name Tesla, of course, comes from Nikola Tesla who invented a resonant transformer circuit around 1891 that produced alternating current electricity.) A sleek Tesla sedan called the Model S is expected to come standard with a lithium-ion battery -- the kind used in laptops and cell phones -- and a 160-mile battery life. It’s also rumored to have a 300-mile extended battery upgrade option is lighter than lead and releases a lot more energy. Tesla plans to have the Model S in production by 2011:
Privately held Tesla has reportedly received more than $185 million in funding from Capricorn Management, Compass Technology Partners, Draper Fisher Jurvetson, JP Morgan, Valor Equity Partners, VantagePoint Venture Partners, Elon Musk Technology, and US Venture Partners. An IPO may be in the offing in 2009.
Tesla, along with Ford and Nissan, are scheduled to get new loans from the U.S. government to help them offset the costs of research and development for more energy-efficient vehicles. The Obama administration has set a 2016 Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFÉ) legislation deadline to improve the fuel mileage of all new model vehicles to meet a minimum of 35.5 MPG and reduce emissions.
Comparisons of Tesla Motors with the early Ford Motor Company are perhaps not inappropriate. Ford was launched in a converted factory in 1902 with $31,000 in cash from twelve investors, most notably John and Horace Dodge, who would later found the Dodge Brothers Motor Vehicle Company. $31,000 adjusted for inflation is approximately $687.000, a shoestring budget when compared with the $185 million reportedly available to Tesla. If the drive, entrepreneurial spirit, and engineering management abilities of Elon Musk are anything like that of the early Henry Ford, his considerably larger start-up funding could bode well for Tesla.

Ford introduced the world's first moving assembly line in 1911, which reduced chassis assembly time by a factor of 10. Eighteen thousand Model Ts were initially built at the Piquette Road Manufacturing Plant, the first company-owned factory. By the time the company moved to its Highland Park Plant in 1911, it was producing over sixty-nine thousand of the increasingly popular “Tin Lizzies.” The company had developed all of the basic techniques of the modern assembly line and mass production by 1913.
Could Tesla's Model S become the Model T of electric cars? Motor Trend suggests that this might be more than hyperbolic fantasy – given Musk’s deep pockets and reliable engineering. Last year, SpaceX, along with a rival in the private launch-vehicle business, Orbital Sciences, received a $3.5 billion NASA cargo resupply contract to provide payload deliveries to the International Space Station after the Shuttle fleet is grounding for good next year (and before NASA's own Orion is operational). SpaceX's share will be $1.6 billion for 12 launches of it Falcon 9 vehicle (numbers which could easily increase).
Could Tesla's Model S become the Model T of electric cars?
While we’re likely to see significant demand for energy efficient electric cars as fossil fuel prices continue to rise –- particularly in urban areas –- there are major impediments to mass acceptance of EVs. Potential plug-in vehicle consumers do not have an adequate place to charge their vehicles. This problem is even more pronounced in places like San Francisco, where only about 16% of cars are parked in garages overnight and the rest end up curbside or in parking lots.
Also, while the U.S. power grid probably has enough overall capacity to supply energy to a nation of plug-in vehicles, it may not have the ability to charge them all when they plug in and demand energy at the same time –- for example, 6pm every weekday.
But these obstacles are not insurmountable given increased market demand for low-cost, high mileage green vehicles. With Falcon rockets delivering payloads to space and Tesla’s electric cars putting market pressure on established players like Ford, Nissan, Toyota, and Honda, Elon Musk’s SpaceX and Tesla Motors are likely to become dominant players in 21st century transportation.
SpaceX Launch Successfully Delivers Satellite Into Orbit
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/07/spacexlaunch/
SpaceX Space Exploration Technologies
http://www.spacex.com/
Tesla Motors
http://www.teslamotors.com/
Tesla Model S Sports Sedan Unveiled at SpaceX Rocket Laboratory
http://www.spike.com/blog/tesla-model-s-sports/75507
Can Elon Musk lead the way to an electric-car future?
http://www.teslamotors.com/display_data/NewYorkerArticle.pdf
Tesla, Ford and Nissan to get loan to develop fuel-efficient autos
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jun/23/news/brf-ford-loan23
Of Rockets and Tesla's Model S
http://www.motortrend.com/features/consumer/112_0904_of_rockets_and_tesla_model_s/index.html
Read and comment on blog posts from h+ editor RU Sirius and others.
I like television.
i can't believe they didn't mention Rudy Rucker.
I think there was a sad technological regression in the '00s, not an "exponential" advance. I have a 2003 Dell PDA which is doing the same tasks...
I am pessimistic about the quick development of human-level AI (in less than 100 years). I don't think we have really started yet.
However,...
Comments
very conservative relative to the company’s historical performance, the stock is regarded as undervalued. The table displays the implied future sales growth of companies assuming their EBITDA margins and Asset turnovers stay at the 5 year median levels.
bet the breakthrough will be in super-capacitors. They already provide the fast charge/discharge necessary, and they can cycle nearly an infinite number of times, all they need now is an increase in capacity so that they can provide power for longer
great article! bookmarked!
- Heavy Hitters Magazine
I certainly hope that their model S is a bit more reliable than the Roadster, which advertises itself as a sport car, but doesn't last on the track, for a few reasons. Brakes overheat to the point of not working, battery dies in minutes doing sporty things with the Roadster, and it takes hours to charge the car.
I'm not sure if they've fixed these problems with the Roadster 2 or not, but we will find out soon enough.
I'm not saying it should be like a Ferrari on the track, but if they want to make an electric sports car, these are very serious problems, particularly the energy drain during acceleration, and the brakes dying. Who cares if it takes days to charge, so long as it can last while you need it to.
Anonymous says "Brakes overheat to the point of not working, battery dies in minutes doing sporty things with the Roadster."
Your claims are plausible but would involve the following worst case scenario:
Drive full throttle to the 125mph and then brake as hard as you can until car stops and repeat. With that you should be using approx 185kW power all of time (engine max) which would render the Tesla car battery empty in roughly 20 minutes. You don’t get far in 20 minutes driving that style, with a Ferrari, Prius, or any automobile.
For accurate information on "Tesla Roadster Efficiency and Range" http://www.teslamotors.com/blog4/"
Keep in mind Moore's Law also applies to battery technology. Every year EV's efficiency and power will grow.
I'd like to add that, in addition to the early PC vendors not reverse-engineering MS-DOS, they also didn't use 8080 chipsets -- in terms of IBM PC clones they used 8088s.. the older mid-70s to mid-80s machines did use either 8080s or Z80s, but ran CP/M from Digital Research. The CP/M industry also had a wide range of vendors though.
Good article though, Musk's amazing. If I were super-rich like that I think I'd invest in some heavy R&D like he is too.. i
"Also, while the U.S. power grid probably has enough overall capacity to supply energy to a nation of plug-in vehicles, it may not have the ability to charge them all when they plug in and demand energy at the same time –- for example, 6pm every weekday."
One way to get around this is to create buffers in every plug location that store a useable given amount of energy per a given amount of time. This would offset the "rush hour" problem. Basically some ....
Read more at:
http://andokal.blogspot.com/
Uh... Microsoft reverse-engineered IBM's DOS, not the other way around. Just for the sake of accuracy.
um... no.
Microsoft sold IBM a license to make IBM-DOS and sold their own copy of MS-DOS as well. No reverse engineering involved.
The reverse engineering was by Phoenix and they created their own BIOS for IBM compatible motherboards. I think COMPAQ did the same thing but i'm not sure.
It's not like they were reverse engineering something that was lost and unclaimed. They were trying to cheat IBM out of their investment in engineering. IBM had intended that people make add-in cards and accessories for their personal computer product. In order to support that they published diagrams and descriptions. The PC 'clone' manufacturers took unfair advantage of that (IMHO) by reproducing fully the IBM invention and then selling it for less than IBM could afford to sell it (IBM had to make back their initial investment, in order to stay in business and to further the high tech art it mostly started). The clone vendors did NOT have to pay back IBM or anybody else for that research and development. Thus the beginning of the low cost PC, not because of diligent invention and entrepreneurialism but because of dishonest pirating.
This is NOT a fair comparison to Ford, Tesla, or SpaceX.
Wow, how can you get it right and get it so wrong?
1) Microsoft licensed Q-DOS from Seattle Computer Products, did some work on the OS to get it running on the soon to be released IBM PC and licensed it as MS-DOS to IBM.
2) IBM did not magically invent the PC with lots of initial investment that was almost lost to "dishonest pirates". IBM saw other companies making money selling computers like the Apple II in a market their management originally thought would not be a viable. The IBM PC was a new entrant in an existing market made up of parts and software from second source vendors some of which were pre-existing, i.e. the aforementioned MS-DOS that started as Q-DOS.
IBM tried to crush up and coming competitors who took advantage of the open piece meal design of the IBM PC to create clones/compatibles but fortunately were defeated. The end result being that IBM had no choice but to compete in a free market rather than having a monopoly based on other people's work. A side benefit, computers became inexpensive and affordable to the masses. IBM along with others have made a killing.
NERDS!
Super-capacitors are already making huge gains, and I also feel that this will be the way to go. They are much lighter, and should be much, much more envorinmentally friendly.
E-cars will probably need some help to initiate viability - like enacting laws for companies with more than 500 employees to have parking available with plugs for E-cars, etc.
E-cars are sooo much more simple and reliable than gas powered, and should eventually replace them.
Except for the fact that your solar powered house with sprayed on solar cells will generate "off grid" power storage and will be enhanced by your electric car if the power goes out as a backup generator. The streets will also have solar energy modules built in the road and at each intersection will be lined with centrifigal force powered electric generation that uses the weight of your braking car to generate more electricity (New Energy Technologies, Inc.). Your electric car will have a harmonically tuned electric coil that will gather electrical current in the road at stoplights and in your garage as a wireless pad (Eric Giler-TED 2009) and may even charge your cell phone while its charging your car.
All within 10 years...I hope (it's out there being developed right now)
"The fledgling space industry is reminiscent of the early days of the personal computer..."
This is a popular and almost entirely misleading comparison.
Computing (all of it, mainframes and then minis and then PCs) took off because it offered both faster and cheaper ways to do things that millions of people were already doing every day: accounting, accessing and storing and sorting records, creating documents (and then artwork & animation & video &...), playing games, etc, etc. IOW, the markets were large and proven, and computing was a better mousetrap. Ditto for early aviation: we already knew people wanted to get from London to Paris or NY to Chicago, and would pay more to do so faster.
Except for communications, weather/surveillance, and navigation satellites (the first of which has been a profitable and in large part private-sector business for decades), that is NOT the case for access to space, especially manned spaceflight. Until people need to make routine business trips to orbit or visit Aunt Rita at the Copernicus colony, it's going to take a long, slow bootstrapping process to build markets.
Computing took off even faster with integrated circuits, because what it does (manipulating bits) can be done equally well, if not better, at smaller and smaller scales of matter and energy. Combine that with the "printing" nature of IC fabrication -- big startup & design costs, but very low cost for each chip after that -- and you get Moore's-Law progress.
That is NOT the case for access to space (or indeed for most other technologies outside IT). If Intel could make 10,000 microscopic rockets (or 747s, oil tankers, bulldozers, or shovels) on a wafer, that wouldn't revolutionize space, or aviation, or petroleum, or construction, because the those technologies need to manipulate large and irreducible amounts of matter and energy.
I welcome lots of entrepreneurial startups and lots of competition in space activity. But the space tech : PC analogy tells us more about the overlap between IT enthusiasts and space enthusiasts than it does about those very different technologies and very different economic contexts.
When image didn't sell anymore the car industry stated to sell on cool features. That is part of the problem, as most consumers want to get from point A to point B, and feel confused by the increasingly black box technology installed. The car of the future is a service.
I think the focus of the article is on the wrong technology.
Tesla will put pressure on other vehicle manufacturers and on the energy grid, but the most significant place it will put pressure is energy storage (batteries, capacitors, etc).
A larger problem than either the sorry state of our energy infrastructure or our vehicle industries is the simple fact that we do not have a way to store electrical energy that is anywhere close to as efficient and easy to use as chemical energy. An increase in vehicles that use electricity as their primary source of power will create market pressure that will encourage the innovations we need in energy storage. That problem has to be solved before either or the others matter. Without practical electrical energy storage it won't matter how much clean power we generate or transport and it won't matter how many vehicles sue electricity; because limited electrical storage limits both of those technologies.
I bet the breakthrough will be in super-capacitors. They already provide the fast charge/discharge necessary, and they can cycle nearly an infinite number of times, all they need now is an increase in capacity so that they can provide power for longer.
Super capacitor breakthrough is supposed to be announced before the end of the year by EESTOR for their partnership with ZENN motors. Also on the solar side Ceramatec, an R&D division of CoorsTek, is developing a battery storage unit that claims to produce solar energy from this battery at 2.5cent kw/hour.
plugging in is not the only option, you could simply swap your discharged battery for a charged one in a gas-station, check this for more info: http://www.carboncommentary.com/2007/11/11/48
Post new comment